“…22 There was also agreement among the findings of these RCTs (Figure 3), as the noted variation in reported results was sufficiently modest to be attributed to chance (P Ͼ .10 for the Q test statistic). 55 Accordingly, the findings of the studies were combined in 2 meta-analyses, 24,25 and the summary OR of cancer recurrence in the allogeneic transfusion (compared with the control) group across the 3 studies was 1.04 (95% CI, 0.81-1.35; P Ͼ .05) (Figure 3). The summary OR of death due to cancer recurrence was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.76-1.26; P Ͼ .05).…”
Section: Randomized Controlled Trials Cancer Recurrencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Jensen et al 3,5 did not present information on some important potential confounding variables (eg, Dukes stage of tumor and tumor fixation to adjacent organs), allowing one to speculate that the observed large TRIM effect (Figure 4) could be due to the effects of uncontrolled confounding factors. 24,25 In addition, selection bias and observation bias are possible in RCTs despite the randomized design and the blinding of investigators, respectively. 94,95 In the RCTs of Jensen et al, 3,5 sicker patients may have been systematically allocated to the treatment arm, and/or investigators who became aware of the treatment allocations may have been inclined to diagnose postoperative infection more often in patients from the treatment arm.…”
Section: Postoperative Infectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[15][16][17][18][19][20] In addition, 7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the risk of cancer recurrence 2,21,22 and/or postoperative infection [3][4][5][6][7][21][22][23] between a treatment arm receiving standard 7 or buffy-coat-reduced red blood cells (RBCs) 2,[4][5][6]21,22 or whole blood 3 and a control arm receiving autologous or white blood cell (WBC)-reduced RBCs or whole blood. 24,25 These studies are based on the assumption that the transfusion of autologous 2,4,21,23 or WBC-reduced 3,[5][6][7]22 RBCs, or whole blood, is immunologically neutral. Both the earlier observational cohort studies and the recent RCTs have produced contradictory findings, and-because of the discrepancies among the published studies-the long-standing hypothesis of the potentially deleterious immunomodulatory effect of perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion remains unresolved.…”
“…22 There was also agreement among the findings of these RCTs (Figure 3), as the noted variation in reported results was sufficiently modest to be attributed to chance (P Ͼ .10 for the Q test statistic). 55 Accordingly, the findings of the studies were combined in 2 meta-analyses, 24,25 and the summary OR of cancer recurrence in the allogeneic transfusion (compared with the control) group across the 3 studies was 1.04 (95% CI, 0.81-1.35; P Ͼ .05) (Figure 3). The summary OR of death due to cancer recurrence was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.76-1.26; P Ͼ .05).…”
Section: Randomized Controlled Trials Cancer Recurrencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Jensen et al 3,5 did not present information on some important potential confounding variables (eg, Dukes stage of tumor and tumor fixation to adjacent organs), allowing one to speculate that the observed large TRIM effect (Figure 4) could be due to the effects of uncontrolled confounding factors. 24,25 In addition, selection bias and observation bias are possible in RCTs despite the randomized design and the blinding of investigators, respectively. 94,95 In the RCTs of Jensen et al, 3,5 sicker patients may have been systematically allocated to the treatment arm, and/or investigators who became aware of the treatment allocations may have been inclined to diagnose postoperative infection more often in patients from the treatment arm.…”
Section: Postoperative Infectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[15][16][17][18][19][20] In addition, 7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the risk of cancer recurrence 2,21,22 and/or postoperative infection [3][4][5][6][7][21][22][23] between a treatment arm receiving standard 7 or buffy-coat-reduced red blood cells (RBCs) 2,[4][5][6]21,22 or whole blood 3 and a control arm receiving autologous or white blood cell (WBC)-reduced RBCs or whole blood. 24,25 These studies are based on the assumption that the transfusion of autologous 2,4,21,23 or WBC-reduced 3,[5][6][7]22 RBCs, or whole blood, is immunologically neutral. Both the earlier observational cohort studies and the recent RCTs have produced contradictory findings, and-because of the discrepancies among the published studies-the long-standing hypothesis of the potentially deleterious immunomodulatory effect of perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion remains unresolved.…”
“…Some of these studies have shown an adverse effect of transfusion on the prognosis of patients with colorectal carcinoma [4][5][6]. Conversely, others have found no transfusion-dependent effect on survival and recurrence [7,8].…”
The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of blood transfusion on recurrence and survival in patients undergoing curative resections for colorectal cancer. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients after elective resections for colorectal cancer between January 2001 and December 2009 was undertaken. The main endpoint was overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence rate. These data were evaluated in relation to blood transfusion (group A, no blood transfusion; group B, one to two blood transfusions; group C, three and more blood transfusions). A total of 583 patients met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Of these, 132 (22.6 %) patients received blood transfusion in the perioperative period. There were 83 (14.2 %) patients who received one or two blood transfusions and 49 (8.4 %) patients who required three or more transfusions. Patients with three or more transfusions had a significantly worse 5-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and increased incidence of distant recurrences in comparison with the group without transfusion or the group with one or two transfusions. Multivariate analysis showed that the application of three or more blood transfusions is an independent risk factor for overall survival (P 00.001; HR 2.158; 95 % CI 1.370-3.398), disease-free survival (P<0.001; HR 2.514; 95 % CI 1.648-3.836), and the incidence of distant recurrence (P<0.001; HR 2.902; 95 % CI 1.616-5.212). Application of three or more blood transfusions in patients operated for colorectal carcinoma is an adverse prognostic factor. Indications for blood transfusion should be carefully considered not only with regard to the risk of early complications, but also because of the possibility of compromising long-term results.
“…Randomized control trials using both leucodepleted blood and autologous blood have not demonstrated an increase in either the risk of cancer or infection (Goodnough 2000;Jensen 1998). A meta-analysis of three randomized control trials and two cohort studies where control groups received either leucodepleted blood or autologous transfusion found no significant differences in cancer recurrence (McAlister 1998).…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.